|
On the Trance Listener
|
View this Thread in Original format
| IntoTrance |
I feel like it is my duty to write this. To inform you all, from an objective point of view, how absolutely ridiculous you have all become. When I say "you," I'm targeting those of you who insist on degrading those with new conceptual ideas with regard to the music (whether it be where they believe Trance is going or ideas for new types of Trance that are outside its own normative definitions) and who have become so incredibly jaded in your experience that you have lost sight of everything good and positive.
First, I would like to establish my credibility. I have listened to Trance, and subsequently various other forms of EDM, for ten years now. I have rarely participated in any formal discussion on these boards, or any other forum for Trance or EDM. That does not, however, discredit me from being able to speak on the subject. My view is undeniably objective for the following reasons. 1) I have not felt it necessary to take any sides in any of the petty arguments you bring to these boards 2) I have been an avid listener and supporter of the music for up to a decade. Let us now move on to my points of distress.
Point One: Definition
You attempt to define a genre of music that needs no definition. You reduce to ridiculously minimal, technical definitions a genre of music whose very goal, as many of you have stated, is to inspire some type of emotional response. Rather than enjoy the emotional response that a certain song might illicit, you immediately look for a way to categorize it and define it. This brings me to my next point.
Point Two: Overanalysis
Who cares if a certain producer has done this, this, and that at a technical level? Why does it matter to you if other than to point out that particular producer's faults or triumphs? What does that have to do with the music? Many of you are disappointed with the "mainstream" direction Trance has been taking (as seen in the recent Armin van Buuren and Tiesto threads). You say that these people should not be associated with the music, that they are only a medium of the music, not a definition of it. Yet you still insist upon examining and overanlysing the music, as per the producer and his technique, thus creating an undeniable connection between the two. You've created your own Cartesian circle of thought that you cannot overcome. Circular ways of thinking are not the only issues at hand.
Point Three: Direction
What is wrong with allowing Trance to gain a foothold with the rest of the more popular music genres? Would this foothold not LEAD to more expansion and progress within the genre once a certain standard has been established? Music evolves, it always has and it always will. Once a standard can be seen, deviations naturally stem from that particular standard. If we were strictly speaking about quality over quantity, we would we discussing Theories in Economics: we are discussing MUSIC. Let the it reach the masses. Let it influence your neighbor who likes 50 Cent, or your best friend who enjoys Fallout Boy. This isn't wrong in anyway: as MANY rational thinkers on these forums have educatively pointed it, it can ONLY help.
Point Four: On Jaded Behavior
Simply put: cut it out. This isn't any elitist group's music. This music belongs to everyone. It is a unique form of music that does not TELL you what to think, that does not GIVE you a concrete purpose. Everyone will view Altitute - Altitude (SHOKK Remix) differently. Upon hearing Paul Oakenfold - Southern Sun (Tiesto's ISOS Remix) or Gouryella - Ligaya, Richard might reminisce about a wonderful summer he had, and Janet might remember back to when she went on a snowboarding trips in the Alps. Each song uniquely provides DIFFERENT mental and psychological associations for EVERYONE. It is irrelevent that music may have become "formulaic" (see Point Two and Three): what matters is the physical and emotional response the song inspires. Have Christians denounced the Bible because it is not written using proper technique? Although I am no advocate for religion, who would we be to denounce religious scripture on the basis of "writing technique" when its message is so much deeper and transcendent? We aren't. Let it be, enjoy the music.
These are currently my points and feelings as to the state of this website and Trance as a whole. Some of you may agree, some of you will whole heartedly disagree. I look forward to responses. |
|
|
| UWM |
COR version?
Edit - I want to go snowboarding with Janet in the Alps. Fo sho. |
|
|
| Clovis |
| Point Five: Not everyone agrees with you. In the words of Christopher Walken "Deal With It" |
|
|
| IntoTrance |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis
Point Five: Not everyone agrees with you. In the words of Christopher Walken "Deal With It" |
I expected replies of this sort. You are, however, entitled to your opinion. I thank you for positively contributing to the conversation. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by IntoTrance
What is wrong with allowing Trance to gain a foothold with the rest of the more popular music genres? |
Nobody buys trance music anymore, and the only people who can't see that are either those who never leave the Internet or those who live in countries where it never sold in the first ing place. It's sold its soul for success, and the biggest irony is that it's never been less popular. |
|
|
| IntoTrance |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
Nobody buys trance music anymore, and the only people who can't see that are either those who never leave the Internet or those who live in countries where it never sold in the first ing place. It's sold its soul for success, and the biggest irony is that it's never been less popular. |
I can name quite a few friends who have legally purchased Trance music via Beatport or other assorted internet portals and Best Buy, Circuity City or other retail business. How is it impossible for the people who do not leave the itnernet or live in countries where it is never sold in the first ing place to not realize that nobody buys trance music? People who do not leave the internet would, through inference and implication, be those who are more highly likely to be pirating music. |
|
|
| Paradox Lost |
Interesting remarks, and although I would like to advance some additional responses to the above points, I would like to remark upon your initial supporting premise:
| quote: | | You attempt to define a genre of music that needs no definition. You reduce to ridiculously minimal, technical definitions a genre of music whose very goal, as many of you have stated, is to inspire some type of emotional response. Rather than enjoy the emotional response that a certain song might illicit, you immediately look for a way to categorize it and define it. This brings me to my next point. |
I'm unclear as to why you insist that Trance is exempt from needing definition. It may be ultimately oriented towards eliciting an emotional reaction, as you have mentioned, but what in the nature of this intent thereby undermines the the usefulness or legitimacy of defining terms?
I agree that there appears to be a bit of excess among many who feel an urgent need to fit certain types of music within an defined and distinctive framework, but simply trying to make sense of the technical aspects of it all doesn't make one guilty of missing the aesthetic point all together.
As a side note, I don't see why a ten year listening streak somehow endows you with credibility, as it says nothing as to what was transpiring throughout that period of time (which is much more important in providing your remarks with added substance, though I feel they're thoughtful enough to stand independent of this). |
|
|
| IntoTrance |
| quote: | Originally posted by Paradox Lost
Interesting remarks, and although I would like to advance some additional responses to the above points |
Feel free.
| quote: | | I agree that there appears to be a bit of excess among many who feel an urgent need to fit certain types of music within an defined and distinctive framework, but simply trying to make sense of the technical aspects of it all doesn't make one guilty of missing the aesthetic point all together. |
My writing may have been vague and, unfortunately, passionate, but this was what I meant. Well summarized.
| quote: | | As a side note, I don't see why a ten year listening streak somehow endows with credibility, as it says nothing as to what was transpiring throughout that period of time (which is much more important in providing your remarks with added substance, though I feel they're thoughtful enough to stand independent of this). |
Experience. Being more inclined towards Empricism in the great argumetns vs. Rationalism, I always feel that establishing some sort of chain of experience is essential to any argument. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by IntoTrance
I can name quite a few friends who have legally purchased Trance music via Beatport or other assorted internet portals and Best Buy, Circuity City or other retail business. How is it impossible for the people who do not leave the itnernet or live in countries where it is never sold in the first ing place to not realize that nobody buys trance music? People who do not leave the internet would, through inference and implication, be those who are more highly likely to be pirating music. |
Your post brilliantly and inadvertently illustrates my point. |
|
|
|
|
